If the hon. member would just be patient and listen.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2008, with 39% of the vote.
Supply May 11th, 1995
If the hon. member would just be patient and listen.
Supply May 11th, 1995
Frankly this is one of the silliest motions we have debated in this Parliament. It is based on a completely false premise about what the government has done in the time it has been in office. There has hardly ever been a government in Canadian history that has so fulfilled the promises it outlined at the beginning of its mandate.
In 30 some years of being a participant in this process I cannot think of another document that has so affected the lives of Canadians and so directed the operations of a govern-
ment than this red book has done. It has been a guide book of promises that the government undertook to do and it has kept the promises.
I want to quote from the red book because it is extremely relevant to the motion before the House. After all the motion does mention this little tome. I will read the whole section on parliamentary reform. I know this may be a little long for the concentration of members opposite but I want to read it in any event.
In the House of Commons, a Liberal government will give MPs a greater role in drafting legislation, through House of Commons committees. These committees will also be given greater influence over government expenditures. More free votes will be allowed in the House of Commons, and individual members of Parliament will be involved in an effective pre-budget consultation process. We will establish mechanisms to permit parliamentary review of some senior Order-in-Council appointments.
The pension regime of members of Parliament has been the focus of considerable controversy. It is now the subject of an independent review, which Liberals support. We believe that reform is necessary.
Supply May 11th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to take part in the debate this afternoon. I heard a few speeches earlier, including the one made by the hon. member for Richmond-Wolfe, whose arguments were completely out of line.
The member made all kinds of suggestions on other bills before the House, but not on the issue being debated today.
The motion tabled by the hon. member for Kindersley-Lloydminster, reads:
That this House condemn the government for its failure to keep its Red Book promise to make the government more open and permitting Members of Parliament to be more accountable to their constituents.
Supply May 11th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member in his speech made very slighting references to a series of excellent appointments the government has made in the last while to various boards and commissions.
He chose to read very selectively from the list of accomplishments of the men and women who had been appointed to these jobs by reading only their qualifications as members of the Liberal Party, which of course would stand anyone in good stead, anywhere, anytime. However, the hon. member neglected to mention in the course of his very partisan remarks the list of qualifications that each of these persons possessed in addition to their membership in the Liberal Party.
I know that the hon. member and his party are moving a motion today that has to do with broken promises. In light of their constant promise in the blue book to come clean with Canadians and tell the truth, would it not behove the hon. member to get up in his answer to my question and read the very impressive CVs of each of the candidates who were appointed to the positions he has just indicated, indicating to the House and all Canadians the excellent qualifications they possess, which entitled them to be appointed to these positions?
Supply May 11th, 1995
To dupe the electors of Alberta.
Supply May 11th, 1995
You are right. The similarities are very apparent.
Supply May 11th, 1995
What about Alberta?
Supply May 11th, 1995
I remember that promise.
Supply May 11th, 1995
Then what did they do?
Questions On The Order Paper May 10th, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the government has been working assiduously on trying to get a response to the hon. member's question.
In fairness to the government-and I acknowledge that the delay has been significant in this case-the hon. member must be aware that the question asks for information from every government department. There has been real difficulty trying to determine which grants made to persons are grants to businesses. In the sense of the hon. member's question, he asks for grants to businesses. It is often difficult for departments to tell if a grant to an individual was a grant to that person's business or to the individual.
Given the complexity of the question and the numerous departments that have to be canvassed, the hon. member will have to exercise his usual patience and wait until the government gets the answer together.